GURCHARNA KAUR Vs. BALJINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a civil revision petition and has been directed against the order dated 6.3.1999 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana who dismissed the objections of the judgment debtor. Some facts can be noticed in the following manner :-

(2.) THE decree holder-respondents filed a civil suit for possession with respect to 3/16th share of land measuring 92 kanals 5-1/2 marlas. The suit was contested at all levels including at the level of High Court. Finally, the decree passed by the trial Court was affirmed upto the High Court in RSA 114 of 1974 decided on 7.2.1993. The decree holder-plaintiffs filed execution application for the first time on 14.6.1993. Unfortunately some khasra numbers regarding which decree was passed in favour of the decree holders could not be included in the execution application. When this omission came to the notice of the decree holder, he made an application for the amendment of the application which was filed on 24.8.1996 and this application was allowed on 22.5.1997. After the filing of the amended execution application the judgment debtors filed objections that the khasra numbers which have been sought to be added in the amended execution application are barred by limitation as when the amended application was filed it had become already time barred. The Executing Court did not accept the contention of the petitioners and for the reasons given in the order the objections were dismissed and in this manner the present revision petition has been filed in this Hon'ble Court.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners relied on Muni Lal v. Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd., AIR 1996(1) SC 462 : 1996(1) RRR 418 (SC); Tarlok Singh v. Vijay Kumar Sabharwal, JT 1996(4) (SC) 245 : 1996(2) RRR 323 (SC) and Gram Panchayat etc. v. Kesho Narain, AIR 1964 Punjab 462, and submits that with regard to the new khasra numbers incorporated in the amended execution application the decree of the decree holders has already become time barred. The submission of the learned counsel is totally without any merit. The objector filed objections to the execution of the decree in the suit. The execution application is nothing but the execution of the decree with respect to entire khasra numbers. The application filed for amendment of the execution application was allowed by the Executing Court on 23.5.1997. This order was never challenged. In these circumstances the petitioners are estopped from objecting to the addition of khasra numbers sought to be added in the execution application as being time barred.